Principles

Why don't we have a thread where individuals names and product names are banned, then perhaqps there is the chance of a thread without nah nah!! and raspberry blowing. I presume there must be people here beyond the level of the Kindergarten.

Lets start with the premis (dangerous) that hi-fi is for listening to music, and not just feeding your ego or for intellectual rattling and masturbation.

Given this what are the principles involved in creating a system to reproduce music, and is it the same root for those pursuing fidelity in sound to those pursuing fidelity to the music / composer / orchestra / band / singer etc. Are they the same?

Richard

PS remember no names!!

 

well said...but then it's easy to say nasty/ egotistical things when you type it on a forum instead of saying it face to face...

 

You are exactly correct - let not the means become the end, resulting in endless equipment swapping.

 

All music is sound. All sound isn't music. However, hifi cannot discriminate between the two and should, in theory, be made to reproduce sound accurately.

The debates start when people discuss which item/system reproduces music better. I've listened to items/systems which are obviously flawed in some way be it limited bandwidth or whatever but which still communicate the musicians intentions better that other items which are more technically correct but musically unsatisfying.

I've been repairing such an amplifier for someone this week. It was deeply flawed and yet it took you right into the heart of the music. How it will fare on less sensitive speakers I don't know, but for me, musically, it ticked all of the boxes and as such was an education.

 

On some types of music a "flawed" amp can do a great job - however on other types those flaws will doubtless make it a disaster.

 

Now this where it is getting interesting, there is obviously a dichotomy here, that is what I wish to explore.

Perhaps the first thing to look at is what is this *bad* amplifier stimulating within you in order to create this difference. Could you describe it?

Richard.

 

Hi Richard,

If I could put my finger on it, I could make & sell alot of amplifiers particularly as this one, on the face of it, had a fairly rudimentary circuit and no really fancy components. I think it came from something in the way the nfb was being applied although I can't be certain.

The effect was a trueness of tone or somehow an ability to make the brain work less hard at interpreting a note and its harmonics. The amp itself wasn't perhaps as 'clear' as others and didn't have thunderous bass, massive control or hugely extended hf response (ie the usual 'hifi' nonsense)but was extremely engaging with all sorts of music. I do listen to quite alot of different amps and make my own and the characteristic this amp had is something I'm working more towards now.

Unfortunately I can't say what this amp is and as this is a 'brandless' thread that's probably a good thing. I've not listened to anything from this mfr before and I suspect this would be the only one of these in the country anyway.

You must have had similar experiences with different circuits from time to time Richard. I'd love to have the equipment at hand to really analyse what it is that I was liking. Unfortunately I've only got my ears. The sig gen & scope only go so far.

 

Might I venture it is some kind of pleasant distortion?

 

The way you describe being able to hear 'tone' and the harmonics of the notes does sound a lot like even order harmonic distortion. A lot of recordings have it added on purpose. Nora Jones for example, you can clearly hear they have applied more to the vocals on the second album.

 

Would you say it activated more of an emotional response instead of an intellectual one? Obviously you think about the results, but originally you *feel* a rightness, would that be correct?

Richard

 

it depends on what types of music you prefer, your physiology, the room you are in, the synergy between your various bits of kit, your psycological makep, your mood, how drunk / stoned / mashed you are... the list is endless, 2 people can listen to the same system in the same room on the same day using the same music and one could call it great and the other could say it's sh1t.
for me all the wrangling that goes on on the internet and all the hyperbolae written in magazines about ultimate this and best that is pointless, but, entertaining for a while, the only truly useful purpouse for these things is to make you aware of the kit that's available and as i'm satisfied with my kit this isn;t a factor.
there is also a social aspect however this seems to be veering off topic.
basicly until you've heard a piece of kit in every room possible with every other bit of kit used to complete a system with every genre of music using my ears and auditary parts of my brain you are not qualified to tell me definitively that somethign is good or not. anything else whether written by internet troll or respected magazine reviewer is just an opinion and those who want to impose their opinions on others or insist that their opinions are better than others go by a particular designation.......imo.
cheers


julian

 

This would be true if this only applied to amplifiers that are technically, or in the nature of *sound*, not so intellectually accurate (this is not reality, as has been said earlier in the thread reality is different to hi-fi). The problem is that patently in my experience that is not the case. Two amplifiers of similar sonic ability (all the hi-fi *words* - yawn) can be shown to have this difference as well.

Richard

 

I am sorry but I dont understand what you have said.

 

So because you are saying that the dichotomy cannot be intellectualised it must be sh1t. Am I correct in this assuption?

Richard

 

Two amplifiers that are sonically equivalent in excellence can perform without that equivalence musically!

Richard

 

Two amps that APPEAR to be sonically equivalent according to an established yet obviously insufficient metric.

 

It seems like you assume a piece of equipment (amp in this case) that is more technically accurate will stimulate the intellectual side of someone rather than the emotional. You are not alone, a lot of people seem to find / believe this.

It seems very wrong to me though. Just because an amp measures well (an intellectual thing) does not mean it won't get you emotionally closer to the music. Indeed, I find this the case most of the time. Accurate systems usually get me closer to the emotion of the music. The key is finding out what aspect needs to be accurate to connect that individual with the music and emotion. For me things like phase, rise time, decay time, IMD and a smooth frequency response are very important factors that get me closer to the emotion and essence of a piece of music. For others it may be having a high even order harmonic content and a huge scale to the sound that just wraps you up in the music.

 

Indeed - if we could determine perfectly if an amp was technically perfect then that amp would be ... perfect.

 

I don't think I believe in dichotomy. I am one with myself, spirit and mind together. Do you think someone who is particularly intellectual and focuses mainly on things to do with the mind, is lacking in spirit or soul?

 

Oh, further to my last post, it may be that it is none of these factors. But that would suggest that either we are not measuring the right thing or that it is an internalised factor - the problem with having an 'observer' and discussing a subjective issue.